Between Kamala Harris, President BRAT, Obama’s hero-turned-villain arc, and Trump, TikTok’s newest Regina George, the path to the Oval Office may as well be buried under a shiny red carpet. Following American politics has started to feel a lot like binging reality TV, where presidents seem less like the executive authority of the United States of America and more like actors role-playing them. Until the present, we have remembered members of the executive branch of the American constitution for politics and foresight for war and economics. Looking back at the 2024 elections, if we were to ask people about Kamala vs Trump, we would probably have someone show us an edited TikTok of Harris synced to “360” by Charli XCX and neon flashing lights as she laughs, “You think you just fell out of a coconut tree.” Or, if we were to ask someone about Trump right now, they would probably show us an edited clip of Trump “putting Zelenskyy in his place” to uplifting music.

The global public sees American politicians as another source of entertainment, no different to actual celebrities: they are a new TikTok audio, a new meme, or a new skit on Saturday Night Live. The media and people have turned politicians into play-actors performing for small screens, and, suffice it to say, they have lost credibility.

It is a valid question to wonder what documentation of our celebrity-adjacent politicians the future generations would be left with and what they would make of it. Reading history, what will they learn of a leader’s purpose? As funny as it might be on our infinite feeds and on the news, the blurring lines between politics and popular culture are actually creating ripples that are reshaping fundamentals. In today’s world, what does it mean to be a political leader? What qualifies someone to run for President? Lastly, and most importantly, what does the public prioritize in their elected officials?

In the age where information is more accessible than ever and in the restructuring of politics through populism, we no longer have the privilege of detachment from being political because, in a way, everything is. The realm of entertainment is no longer superficial fun but rather speaks volumes about one’s political alignments. Therefore, when we scroll through the admittedly entertaining edits of political leaders and watch them on the news (or choose not to), we are not operating in a vacuum but feeding into or weakening narratives about what and how political leaders should be in our society.

Political leaders did not just wake up and decide to chase fame – for the longest time, this was not even a priority. But soon, access to information increased, and social media gave politicians the opportunity to connect with their voters on a more personal level. It also forced them to prioritise success on social media, though virality on social media was worlds away from success on Capitol Hill. Circumstances caused leaders to merge the two spheres, and that resulted in what we see today. Is it successful? The fact that most people cannot go a day without making some reference to American politics, even outside of the U.S., indicates this.

The evidence is in people reposting and editing political interactions, fan accounts, and series explaining feuds and campaigns. The media is officially obsessed with American political leaders. Around eight months ago, it was Kamala; now it is Donald Trump. This dangerous interplay between politics and celebrity blurs the boundaries between the two until future generations looking back can no longer recall key fundamentals needed in a political leader that do not include their personality, popularity, and penchant for making exaggerated controversial statements.

President Zelenskyy walks into the Oval Office and engages in a heated discussion with the President and Vice President. Yet the strongest and most prominent criticism that people had is the fact that he was not wearing a suit. In response, many berated the comments about suits to draw attention to how his military garb shows constant support for his country. Why are we talking about his lack of a suit or the fact that American leaders pointed this out and not talking enough about the terrible breakdown of diplomacy and Zelenskyy’s purpose as a political leader for holding that meeting in the first place? Why are there edits on social media making fun of dialogues in the meeting, as if this was some lighthearted reality-TV show? For a lot of people involved, the Ukraine war is a reality, and the exchange was televised, and yet, the gravity of what conspired is undermined by the entertainment it brings to people.

Why did Kamala Harris decide to be a BRAT president instead of a firm presidential candidate who could assure people that she would do things differently than her predecessor? Why is being BRAT even a factor for what we look for in a presidential candidate? Why are the current president’s speeches being used as TikTok sound bites to show how “teen girl coded” Trump is? Why is this an important thing to say about a president?

I cannot answer these questions, but I can say that they are valid, and not enough people are asking them. Media makes us passive consumers of information, but in the increasingly political age we live in, we cannot afford to be passive because entertainment is no longer just entertainment. Making edits or memes of political leaders of sovereign countries is not the same as making edits of celebrities because political leaders are meant to represent something, to push a vision. They are not role-players for entertainment, and if in our world they already are, then we really, really need to understand what this means for the future generations.